As The Colony Turns: Funny Business at the Anaheim Planning Department?

First of all, we here at FFFF don’t profess to be experts on urban planning, but something doesn’t seem quite kosher down in our neighbor to the south.

Our Intrepid Travis just got word from one of his Colony sources that the City of Anaheim is now smiling on the legality of Lorri Galloway’s 4th District carpetbagging rental residence in a house located in their “light office professional” (O-P) zone. Check it out. Why is the City smiling? Because apparently they believe that since the fake “carriage house” on site has a studio apartment in it, the whole Taormina property is wide open for residential use.

Hmm. Now that’s quite a leap, but not all that surprising given that Lorri Galloway is an Anaheim city councilmember and Taormina is a big Anaheim property owner and political big shot. So is the story over? We wonder. Consider a few facts.

First, the land use is O-P, within the commercial zoning division, as noted above. The Anaheim commercial zoning code tables provide for no residential uses in the O-P zone at all. None. The city does have a defined “mixed use” overlay zone, but it does not appear at all on the zoning map legend, and it is not shown applying to the property in question. So what gives? How did Taormina get a residential unit on that property in the first place?

Let’s say for the sake of argument that there is indeed a “mixed use” overlay on this O-P property, that is not reflected on the zoning map. The Mixed Use zone definition clearly states that there shall be a commercial use on the ground floor facing the street (modified only by Conditional use permit); and that a Conditional Use Permit shall determine the number of live/work units. So unless Lorri is inhabiting only the upper floor of that house, she needs a CUP. And furthermore Taormina not only needed a CUP to establish a residential use in the first place (if in fact there was an MU overlay), he would need to either modify it or get a new CUP to expand the number of existing MU units.

And here’s another thought: if the existing residential unit does not meet code then it is hard to see how an expansion of it is justifiable especially when expansion of even a legal non-conforming use is generally prohibited in land use law.

Ah, well. Let Heaven and Earth be moved to accommodate Galloway’s carpetbagging! And let the Colonists bang their tabors and joyously welcome their new, well-connected neighbor!